Jules Jones

Yog's Law: Money flows *towards* the author

Previous Entry Add to Memories Share Next Entry
Girls who like boys who do boys (preliminary notes)
cat-vacuuming (Suzanne Palmer for rasfc)
julesjones
I've been threatening for some time to do an essay that summarises the "why do girls like boys who do boys?" thread from rasfc in June/July 2003. This is a placeholder, with some notes as I go through the thread. Please feel free to comment and add further suggestions -- I'll work it up into something more coherent later. Possibly much later.

There was also discussion of the difference between graphic and explicit, whether it is possible to tell whether an erotica writer is male or female (often, but not always, yes), definitions of homosexuality through the ages, fanfic, and is there anyone in the known universe who doesn't want to shag Legolas...

[ETA: this was a discussion on a pro sf writers' group and was initially about profic, although we also drew on fanfic as the discussion progressed. I haven't explicitly identified most of the people involved, but as several of them read this LJ, if anyone wants to be credited, speak up. :-)]

a) Why do women like m/m:

The classic answer is "Why do straight men like f/f?" But while that's a factor, it's a bit more complicated than that. And the one thing everyone agreed on is that different women will have different reasons for enjoying m/m, and the following are just some common ones that don't necessarily apply to all m/m fans, or even the same person all the time.

***

There was speculation from some of the guys that a lot of the attraction f/f has for straight men is from envisioning expecting to be invited to join the party.

A lot of the women in the discussion agreed that this was a factor in straight women enjoying m/m -- while we know perfectly well that if they're really gay, we won't be invited, it doesn't bar enjoyment of the fantasy, any more than knowing that we aren't really going to get off with some hot actor stops us fantasising about meeting him in a hotel somewhere and having hot monkey sex with him. [I'll note here that knowing that John Barrowman is both gay and married to his partner of many years does not stop me having such fantasies about him...]

Mary Gentle mentioned: "The women/MM theory used to be the exact opposite -- that because the participants were both oriented towards males, there was no chance the woman could be invited to join, and hence there'd be no sexual anxiety on her part." I've seen this one mentioned before, usually by women who think it's batshit insane (though Mary phrased it slightly more politely).

It was also common to simply enjoy the aesthetics -- it's pleasurable to watch because they look so pretty, and if one is good, two are better. AKA, "I'm a straight woman, why would I want to look at a naked woman, if I'm going to look at two naked sweaty bodies I'll have them both male, thank you very much." Drop the "why would I want to look at a naked woman?" and you have part of the appeal for many bi and even some lesbian women.

Men are stereotypically emotionally controlled, and m/m is a way to see not just one but *two* of them opening up emotionally, and having to deal with their emotions. They're allowed to care about each other, and to show that they care, and that appeals to women.

The illicit pleasure of enjoying something we've been told we shouldn't enjoy.

And with fanfic, the malicious pleasure of taking two all-action heroes from a show where the token woman is there as a Bad Conduct Prize and doing things with them that would cause the target male audience to faint.

Another comment:
"The theory I've heard on women and MM texts is that it's an
additive combination of the following:

- romances involving people who do active and exciting things are fun
- romances involving egalitarian relationships are fun
- MF romances have extreme difficulty being egalitarian
- men are more able to do interesting and exciting things

Ergo: fun romances involve an egalitarian, hence same-sex,
couple, doing active and exciting things, hence male. "

It simply feels fresher than m/f, for someone who's read an awful lot of m/f.

If you want to explore a non-egalitarian or power-play relationship, writing m/f means dealing with readers' expectations about gender roles. Writing m/m (and f/f) allows an author to explore such a relationship without the cultural baggage. Sometimes a writer might want to do that in order to highlight those expected gender roles, and sometimes it might simply get in the way of looking at *other* sources of power differential, such as class.

There's also the fact that even without gender role expectations, having the same plumbing on both sides makes for different power dynamics. And as someone mentioned elsewhere, straight men aren't used to being penetrated -- watching them deal with that is interesting, and ties into the thing about men making themselves emotionally vulnerable.

Enjoying identifying with the male characters -- and m/m gives you two for the price of one.


b) Why isn't more of it published:

cynical versions:

"Especially as the suits at the conglomerates are typically middle-aged men, who don't want to believe that anyone could like that queer stuff when they could be reading about mud-wrestling Amazons instead."
And not just middle-aged men: "There are plenty of women who really don't like That Sort Of Thing, for whatever reason, and it's clear that it's never occurred to some of them that other women do." (JJ)

"It used to drive me potty that publishers of women's porn would say, oh, well, we don't want too much MM sex, women don't read it -- until I realised that they were bothered about their 25% or 50% crossover _male_ readership, who were the ones they really thought would be put off by MM scenes. And they needed those sales. [1] Didn't seem to occur to them that they might have gathered a female readership larger than the male one they might lose." (MG)


Fascinating stuff, and I'll think about it and try to respond. For now, just one other thing: I hate seeing some male character I fancy in a clinch with some hussy; I don't at all mind seeing him in a clinch with a bloke. Doesn't feel so like competition. FWIW, I do believe that in RL I would be less upset if my bloke went with another man than with another woman (amazed, but less upset) because at least I'd feel that whatever he had gone looking for was something I couldn't have given him, so I wouldn't feel a failure.

We had a good discussion at Redemption about Why Do Lesbians and Straight Men like M/M. My own feeling is that there is no single reason for people's enjoyment of slash, and certainly your own viewpoint on enjoying slash differs from mine.

What I did mention at the discussion was that lesbians and straight men into m/m let us dispose with several arguments *as universal explanations* (not necessarily as personal explanations, or as explanations applicable to many.) The 'one man is hot, two are hotter' and 'it's all about The Other' theories cannot apply to lesbian/straight male slashers as they do to heterosexual females. One may say that these (or rather we!) are not the majority of slashers and therefore don't count, but non-female, non-heterosexual slashers do allow others to question what may seem 'natural' assumptions about their enjoyment of slash.

I have never felt that my enjoyment of slash had anything to do with sexual desire for men. I also tend to oppose the 'it's sexy' argument, as through many years of my enjoyment of slash I didn't read a single fic I found 'sexy' :) Others differ in their enjoyment of slash, but there are many to whom the obvious (to female people attracted to men) explanations do not apply. :)

certainly your own viewpoint on enjoying slash differs from mine.[...] I have never felt that my enjoyment of slash had anything to do with sexual desire for men

Well, I don't think mine has that much to do with it either. Mine is closely connected with my enjoyment of angst. I like it because it opens characters up and makes them vulnerable. I like emotive stuff while hating goo and fluff, and I think the goo-hate is one reason i don't like het, which too often turns out like that.

(Or were you referring back to julesjones's original post? That seems more likely, but for the comment indent.)

I was responding initially to your comment on "I hate seeing some male character I fancy in a clinch with some hussy", which doesn't really apply in my case (though it made me grin.) :) The comment on sexual desire etc was intended as a separate point, more in reference to the original post (I was too lazy to make two separate ones as I was running out of the door -- sorry!)

I certainly agree with you on the angst. One of my other comments at Redemption and elsewhere was that I see slash and H/C as pretty much the same genre. I think of it as 'emotiporn', and feel I get the same thing from a slash story and an angsty suffering fic -- it's about escalating the level of emotion/expression. This ties in with slash motivations, as my lack of desire for actual physical suffering is somewhat comparable to my lack of desire for hot man action. Most people do not consider masochism a relevant qualification for H/C, and equally I don't feel that desire for the male is the most useful starting point for analysing slash. :)

The above is not aimed at refuting anyone's argument particularly. It's just me thinking 'aloud' on the topic. I find the fact that we slash pretty fascinating, but also mysterious.

whether it is possible to tell whether an erotica writer is male or female (often, but not always, yes)

I find this very interesting, I hope you can expand on it later.

Just out of interest, does this read like a male or female writer?

Neither, particularly.

Hard to say. If I read it in a non-test situation I would have thought female. But feeling myself being tested I became all tensed up. ;-)

This seems a very full analysis. I tend to find people zoom in on one or two 'explanations' but I think this covers a good selection, and it would be a really good read for people who either hadn't thought about the issue, or had settled too quickly for a single 'explanation'.

spacefall mentioned her excellent panel on 'gay women and straight men who like slash', which you would have enjoyed, shame you couldn't be there. I am still not convinced there are many of the latter (i.e. straight male fans), but there are obviously quite a few of the former (ie gay women fans).

For me a big issue is the ever-retreating, ever-elusive nature of desire. What you can't have is always more tempting, and m/m, almost by definition, is what one can't have. Perhaps for this reason I prefer hints and unexpected kisses on screen to fully worked out fiction (in many cases).

I've probably told you before: "because the Bible said so".